LAW FIRM WANTS OUT OF MADSTER MUSIC INFRINGEMENT CASE
Law firm of famed litigator David Boies asked federal judge to let it withdraw from defending music file-sharing service Madster, formerly Aimster. Move cast shadow over bankrupt company’s ability to help shape and to appeal preliminary injunction authorized by U.S. Dist. Judge Marvin Aspen against service.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Withdrawal motion filed last week by Boies, Schiller & Flexner said Madster was seeking substitute counsel. But company owner John Deep said in interview this week that Madster hadn’t secured new representation and its prospects were unclear. Madster, which is in Chapter 11 reorganization, owes Boies, Schiller about $400,000. “I don’t know [that Boies’ motion is] solely a matter of my financial situation, but certainly that is a reality in this circumstance,” Deep said. He wouldn’t elaborate. His Boies, Schiller attorney, George Carpinello of Albany, N.Y., couldn’t be reached for comment.
Aspen, chief judge of U.S. Dist. Court in Chicago, declared Sept. 4 that Madster contributorily had infringed on copyrights and asked plaintiff music companies to draft injunction language. They responded with language that would prevent anyone connected with Madster from participating in any infringement on state or federal protections of existing and future works. Draft said Madster would: (1) Have to shut down its service until it imposed measures to prevent all use of copyrighted works. (2) Actively have to monitor, patrol and preclude access to copyrighted music using all technology “tools and measures that are reasonably available.” (3) Require Madster to file monthly compliance reports and make available to music companies complete list of all songs available through its system, along with “computer, Web site and computer server logs delineating user search requests, download requests and upload attempts for any all sound records and musical compositions.”
Deep said music companies were trying to put entire burden of curtailing infringement on Madster, rather than offering to share challenge as required by Napster case. He said it was unclear how Madster could filter sharing of music between users since it was encrypted. In practical terms, proposed language would mean end of Madster, Deep said: “They look like they're asking for a complete, immediate shutdown.” Madster asked last week for 30-day extension to respond to proposed injunction language. Hearing is set for Oct. 1 in Judge Aspen’s Chicago court.
Aspen’s ruling broke new ground in legal battle against peer-to-peer music sharing, including his saying Madster could be held legally responsible for users’ activities and enjoined regardless of how decentralized its service was. Deep had said earlier that appeal could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.